|
|
Post by raysgm on Nov 29, 2017 21:40:47 GMT -5
As we know, over the past couple years, we have only been able to sign Tier 2 free agents to multi-year contracts. I wanted to suggest a couple changes to this tier.
Option A) If a player is over a certain age (say 35? 38? Doesn't really matter much to me), we are allowed to offer them a 1 year contract in Tier 2.
Option B) Now that we have buyouts on options (and hence, penalties for declining options), we revert Tier 2 to allowing 1+1 contracts as we've done in previous years.
Option C) Leave as is.
I've attached a poll asking for what we'd prefer, thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by KC Royals Nate on Nov 29, 2017 21:49:38 GMT -5
Can you explain option B more? I wasn't here in the previous years
|
|
|
|
Post by raysgm on Nov 29, 2017 22:03:10 GMT -5
Can you explain option B more? I wasn't here in the previous years Instead of only allowing multi-year contracts, we also allow 1 year contracts as long as you attach an option at the end. It kind of backfired because we used to have no penalty for declining an option, so all these crappy players were signed in Tier 2 and then had their option declined the following year. I'd also suggest that if we were to implement a 1 year contract in Tier 2, we could throw a minimum salary on (like you can offer a 1+1 contract, but only if the salary is > $5 MM or something) |
|
|
|
Post by BrewCrewGuru on Nov 30, 2017 9:12:46 GMT -5
I'd be fine with essentially merging T2 and T3
|
|
|
|
Post by Cubbies on Dec 1, 2017 14:57:20 GMT -5
The committee was already discussing the idea of reducing Tier 2 to only 1 week, to allow teams to get to the shorter contracts quicker. Personally I like the idea of keeping Tier 2 as multi-year guaranteed contracts to avoid the 1 year deals, especially since I know the free agency calculator still favors shorter deals more than a real life player would.
The "old player" rule is intriguing though. I like it and don't like it at the same time. While I agree with the idea of giving them shorter contracts, I still think they'd prefer multiple years. And I don't want to become a league that is bogged down by all sorts of "if/or/and/but" rules.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2017 15:38:17 GMT -5
hey I'm just new around here, but I like 1 year deals without the need for options for a team like mine. I've got some holes to fill, and I also have some bad contracts to wait out ebfore I can properly get a rebuild in gear. signing some moderate contracts to 1 year is a real option for trying to maintain the wins , maybe even increae wins to see a cap increase. Why do we demonize 1 year deals? guys sign them all the time and in a projections league, they probably aren't gpoing to take the hit they would in real stats league, so they'll probably get a second contract in the following FA period. just my thinking,
|
|
|
|
Post by Cubbies on Dec 1, 2017 15:53:02 GMT -5
hey I'm just new around here, but I like 1 year deals without the need for options for a team like mine. I've got some holes to fill, and I also have some bad contracts to wait out ebfore I can properly get a rebuild in gear. signing some moderate contracts to 1 year is a real option for trying to maintain the wins , maybe even increae wins to see a cap increase. Why do we demonize 1 year deals? guys sign them all the time and in a projections league, they probably aren't gpoing to take the hit they would in real stats league, so they'll probably get a second contract in the following FA period. just my thinking, We don't have a problem with one-year deals. We just made it so they can't be signed so early in free agency. The thinking was that a player would prefer a multi-year offer, so they wouldn't be signing a one-year offer on the first or second day of free agency. They'd explore multi-year offers first, and then if no team was willing to give them one, then they'd sign a one-year deal. |
|
|
|
Post by Nationals on Dec 1, 2017 15:56:17 GMT -5
I think it just kind of over complicates things. Allow teams to sign players for the length they determine is suitable for the team. Even Tier 1 players shouldn't be restricted from one year deals. Just my feeling though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2017 15:56:20 GMT -5
hey I'm just new around here, but I like 1 year deals without the need for options for a team like mine. I've got some holes to fill, and I also have some bad contracts to wait out ebfore I can properly get a rebuild in gear. signing some moderate contracts to 1 year is a real option for trying to maintain the wins , maybe even increae wins to see a cap increase. Why do we demonize 1 year deals? guys sign them all the time and in a projections league, they probably aren't gpoing to take the hit they would in real stats league, so they'll probably get a second contract in the following FA period. just my thinking, We don't have a problem with one-year deals. We just made it so they can't be signed so early in free agency. The thinking was that a player would prefer a multi-year offer, so they wouldn't be signing a one-year offer on the first or second day of free agency. They'd explore multi-year offers first, and then if no team was willing to give them one, then they'd sign a one-year deal. oh, ok, figured that was baked in. |
|
|
|
Post by phillies17 on Dec 1, 2017 16:26:45 GMT -5
I like the idea of 1 year deals, they work very well for re-build teams.
I would also like to see the trade restriction eliminated for any deal less than 3 years. Maybe the 1+1 with no trade restriction could be a happy medium
|
|
|
|
Post by LA Angels GM on Dec 1, 2017 16:54:52 GMT -5
My two cents... since we now have buyouts on 1 year deals, I'm all for 1+1 deals at any time.
|
|
|
|
Post by raysgm on Dec 2, 2017 1:41:55 GMT -5
I like the idea of 1 year deals, they work very well for re-build teams. I would also like to see the trade restriction eliminated for any deal less than 2 years. Maybe the 1+1 with no trade restriction could be a happy medium. I believe 1 year contracts do not have NTCs |
|
|
|
Post by rockiesgm on Dec 2, 2017 9:11:07 GMT -5
I voted for things to remain the same but I would be ok with making Tier 2 shorter. I think this rule adds a little more strategy to free agency. Each GM has to really place a value on the "tweener" players. If you want a player, sack-up and commit to the two year contract or roll the dice and see if he makes it to Tier 3.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2017 12:34:11 GMT -5
I'd still like to see Tier 1 moved to early December to try to get the big names out of the way. This allows a lot of time to trade after Tier 1 if you miss a guy you were targeting. Now, you have till the end of the week to figure out which way you want to go if you don't land your guy. Think of it as Winter Meetings.
Late November - league open for business/trades
Early December - Tier 1 (Top 10)
Early January - Winter Draft
Mid February - Tier 2 (Multi Year deals)
Week later - Tier 3 (Any guaranteed deals)
Week later - Tier 4 (MLI allowed)
|
|
|
|
Post by LA Angels GM on Dec 4, 2017 12:47:54 GMT -5
That's actually not a horrible idea. Even a one-week break between tiers 1 and 2 could be useful.
|
|
Whitesox
AAA
I'm just here for the free kool-aid
Posts: 773
|
Post by Whitesox on Dec 4, 2017 16:48:18 GMT -5
I also like Mike's idea, I think it should be explored.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pirates GM on Dec 5, 2017 11:13:31 GMT -5
Mike’s idea makes a ton of sense to me, and I think it would add some serious interest and strategy to the FA period.
JIm
|
|
